Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
Craig Paukert
Michael McInerny
Randall Schultz
Paukert is assistant leader-fisheries at the U.S. Geological Survey
Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Kansas State
University, Manhattan. McInerny is a fisheries research biologist
at the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Hutchinson,
and he can be contacted at Mike.McInerny@dnr.state.mn.us.
Randall Schultz is a fisheries research biologist at the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources, Chariton.
VOL
32
FEBRUARY
2007
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
METHODS
We used the Internet, a mail survey, and
Quinn (2002) to gather information on current and historical creel, length-based, and
season regulations and their rationale in all
states and provinces with fisheries of largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and spotted
bass. We used the Internet to gather information on current (2002) creel and
length-based regulations for these three
species by visiting the website of each state
or provincial agency that manages black bass
fisheries. We gathered current season closure
data from Quinn (2002). We used a mail survey to gather data on the rank of angler
preference of black bass relative to other
game fishes (based on state or province-wide
angler preference surveys); the year when
the most recent angler preference survey was
done; the year when current regulations for
each species were established; the rationale(s) for current regulations; the decade
when the first state- or province-wide creel
limit, length limit (including type of length
limit), and fishing season restrictions were
implemented; the rationale for each histori63
cal regulation; and the decade(s) when regulations were changed including the type of
regulation and rationale. We also asked
responders to list special regulations differing
from state- or province-wide regulations. To
facilitate completion of the survey and subsequent data analysis, most questions were
closed-ended, but space was provided for
additional open-ended responses. Before we
distributed the survey to each agency, an
agency administrator and three biologists
reviewed the draft survey and provided comments. These comments were then
incorporated into the final survey instrument. The survey was sent to either agency
biologists known to be working with black
bass or administrative personnel (e.g., chief
of fisheries) in all states and provinces with
known black bass fisheries. Agencies that
did not return surveys within 4 months
received an e-mail reminder or another survey.
Data Analyses
We visually identified geographical
trends in current (2002) state- and provincewide creel and length limits by displaying
these data on maps of the United States and
(before 1940 and after 1960) of more restrictive regulations. A change was categorized as
liberal to restrictive if a creel limit decreased
or was added if nonexistent before, if a minimum length limit was added or increased, if
a maximum limit was added or decreased, or
if a season closure was added or extended.
The change was categorized as restrictive to
liberal if the converse occurred.
We also determined the change in the
number of states with statewide creel limits,
length limits, and season closures between
1974 and 2002, and the magnitude of
change if changes occurred between these
two periods. Fox (1975) compiled the creel
limit, length limit, and length of season closure in each of the 48 contiguous states
during 1974. From the Internet survey, we
gathered data on statewide creel limits and
length limits for the same 48 states during
2002. We used data in Fox (1974) and
Quinn (2002) to determine changes in season closures between 1974 and 2000. To
determine if rationales changed over time,
we compared rationales listed to justify the
first regulation and the current regulation for
each species. We gathered these data via the
mail survey.
Figure 1. State or province-wide creel limits of black bass in the United States and Canada, based on an Internet survey in 2002.
64
Fisheries
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
RESULTS
We visited websites of 49 state and 8
provincial agencies that potentially regulate black bass fisheries. We also received
a total of 47 mail surveys, an 82% return
rate, but several were not fully completed.
We did not receive mail surveys from
Hawaii, Montana, Rhode Island, Virginia,
West Virginia, Wyoming, British
Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, or
Quebec. Alberta has never had restrictive
regulations on these species because all
attempts to establish black bass fisheries
failed.
Current Regulations
Based on our Internet search, 48 states
and 7 provinces had a state- or provincewide creel limit for black bass, and 9 states
and provinces had multiple creel limits
(i.e., more than one creel limit for all
black basses; Figure 1). Because nearly all
(88%) states and provinces did not separate state or province-wide regulations by
species of black bass, we presented current
regulations for all black basses combined.
This included those states and provinces
that were partitioned into regional management units, but creel limits did not
differ among units. Creel limits during
part or all of the fishing season ranged
from catch and release (New Brunswick,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and
Vermont) to 10 fish (Alabama, Georgia,
Hawaii [not shown in Figure 1], Louisiana,
Mississippi, and South Carolina). A total
of 27 states and provinces had state- or
province-wide minimum length limits
(including jurisdictions divided into
regional units), and 11 of these had multiple minimum length limits (Figure 2). No
other type of state- or province-wide
length limit was found. Hawaii, not shown
in Figure 2, had a minimum length limit of
23 cm (9 in) in 2002. In general, more
restrictive length limits (mean = 35 cm
[14 in]) were found in the midwestern
United States and Great Plains states.
Arkansas waters with black bass fisheries
are managed individually, so this state did
not have a statewide creel limit or minimum length limit.
Based on mail surveys, most of these
current regulations for each species of black
bass became established after 1980 (Figure
Figure 2. State or province-wide minimum length limits (in inches) on black bass in the United States and Canada, based on an Internet survey in 2002.
Fisheries
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
65
More season closures were used to manage largemouth bass and smallmouth bass
before 1900, but the 1930s was the peak
decade when creel limits and length limits
became established for these species (Figure
3). The peak decade when most regulations
of all types became established for spotted
bass was also the 1930s (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Decade of enactment of the first and current state- or province-wide creel limit, length limit, and season closure for largemouth bass,
smallmouth bass, and spotted bass, based on mail surveys completed in 2002.
66
Fisheries
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
reduced bag for largemouth bass and smallmouth bass longer than a certain length.
The decade of enactment of the first
creel and minimum length limits on largemouth bass and spotted bass was a function
of geographic location, but this was not the
case for smallmouth bass (Table 1). The earliest season closures for largemouth bass and
smallmouth bass were not linked with geographic location, but we could not
Figure 4. Rank of angler preference of black bass in the United States and Canada, based on mail surveys completed in 2002.
Table 1. Mean decade of the first state- or province-wide creel limit, minimum length limit, and season closure for largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and spotted
bass as a function of latitude (5-degree increments) and longitude (10-degree increments) in the United States and Canada.
Latitude (degrees)
< 35
35 to 39
40 to 44
> 45
Longitude (degrees)
< 80
80 to 89
90 to 99
100 to 109
> 110
Fisheries
VOL
Creel limit
Largemouth Smallmouth Spotted
bass
bass
bass
Season closure
Largemouth Smallmouth Spotted
bass
bass
bass
1940
1940
1920
1910
1940
1940
1930
1910
1960
1940
1920
1920
1950
1940
1920
1940
1940
1930
1900
1940
1940
1920
1910
1940
1920
1930
1930
1940
1920
1920
1930
1940
1950
1920
1900
1930
1940
1970
1950
1910
1930
1940
1970
1950
1900
1920
1930
1940
1940
1910
1910
1930
1950
1940
32
NO
FEBRUARY
1950
1950
1930
1930
1940
1980
1960
2007
1970
1940
1960
1930
1960
1990
1930
1940
1930
1930
1940
1940
1930
67
tiguous states now have creel limits compared to 47 in 1975 (Wyoming did not have
creel limits in 1974). Creel limits decreased
in all except 11 states and the median reduction was 5 (range 0 to 19). A total of 14
states added minimum length limits and 11
of 14 increased their minimum length limit
by an average of 76 mm (3 in) between 1974
and 2002. The number of states with
restricted fishing seasons where no harvest is
allowed dropped from 14 in 1974 to 7 in
2000.
Lastly, based on mail surveys, many states
and provinces are progressing towards individual lake management and using special
regulations rather than relying on state- or
province-wide regulations. At least four
responders (from Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois,
and Louisiana) stated that they no longer
have statewide regulations (although creel
limits within three states were the same in
most water bodies). Thirty-seven responders
(79%) reported a total of 92 special regulations currently in effect. Minimum length
(38%), protected slot (24%), and creellength limit combinations (10%) were the
most common special regulations listed.
DISCUSSION
Similarities in current and historical
trends in regulation changes among each
species of black bass reflect that regulations
in most states and some provinces were not
separated by species. Differences are linked
to the variable spatial distribution of each
species. Based on our Internet survey, regulations in 2002 were not partitioned by species
in 88% of the 56 states and provinces. We
did not ask in our mail survey if earlier regulations were segregated by species; however,
several responders reported that earlier regulations were the same for all black basses.
Spotted bass now inhabit waters in 23 states
(all below 45o latitude) and no provinces,
but smallmouth bass inhabit waters in 47
states and 7 provinces, and largemouth bass
inhabit waters in 49 states and 5 provinces
(Scott and Crossman 1971; Fuller et al.
1999). Thus, because trends in some regulation types were linked with latitude, trends
reported for spotted bass could differ from
trends reported for the other two species
because the influence of states and provinces
without spotted bass were excluded.
Season closures for black bass were more
common in jurisdictions where anglers rank
black bass second or lower. These jurisdictions also typically had season closures for
other game species, which might have influenced the implementation of black bass
regulations to ensure consistency in regulations. In five states and provinces where
black bass rank two or lower among anglers,
fishing seasons are closed for all species or all
game species (Quinn 2002). In the other
three states and provinces (Michigan,
Minnesota, and Quebec), season closures
exist for other game fish species, but closure
dates differ between black basses and the
other species.
The trends in rationale reflect trends in
regulation types. Protection of spawners was
the most common rationale for the earliest
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
Need a
reliable
method to
track and
monitor
your fish?
Choose VEMCOs sophisticated
coded tags and receivers to
provide the best results.
Survival studies
Hydro Dam passage
Fish population movements (smolt migration)
Marine Protected Area (MPA) analysis
Spawning timing and effort
Studies of endangered populations
Making Waves in
Acoustic Telemetry
69
Figure 5. Frequency of rationales used to justify the first and current creel, minimum length, or season closures on largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and
spotted bass in the United States and Canada, based on mail surveys completed in 2002.
70
Fisheries
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
and provinces. Processes required for regulation change no doubt differ among jurisdictions and probably affected the spatial and
temporal trends in regulation changes and the ability of black bass
managers to apply special regulations for individual waters.
State- and province-wide decreases in creel limits and removal or
addition of season restrictions probably had little affect on black bass
populations, but the increased use of state- and provincial-wide minimum length limits probably have mixed effects. Except where most
strict, current creel limits have little effect on black bass populations
because few anglers harvest their limit (Fox 1975; Noble and Jones
1999). Season closures designed to protect spawners are ineffective
because they include periods when angling vulnerability is low. The
closed period oftentimes does not include the entire spawning
period, displaced bass caught by anglers may not return to nests, and
population structures do not change after season closures are
removed (Fox 1975; Quinn 2002). Conversely, state- and provincial-wide minimum length limits should have effects ranging from
undesirable to acceptable. Evaluations of minimum-length limits
revealed that some bass populations stockpile at lengths just below
the minimum, population sizes vary depending on the length of minimum length limit, and minimum length limits often do not improve
size structure of bass populations (Rasmussen and Michaelson 1974;
Ager 1991; Wilde 1997).
Track
Track your
your fish
fish with
with
the
the newest,
newest, most
most
advanced
advanced acoustic
acoustic
tracking
tracking receiver
receiver
available
available today.
today.
CONCLUSIONS
Our survey results suggest that regulations on black basses have
changed over time, but changes oftentimes did not coincide with
advances in scientific knowledge of black bass biology. Creel limits
or minimum length limits are still used on a regionwide basis in most
jurisdictions, and these are more restrictive than earlier regulations
of the same type. The use of season closures has declined over time.
Although a slow process, the practice of managing individual waters
appears to be expanding. At least four jurisdictions now manage
black bass fisheries on an individual water body basis, and most jurisdictions now use special regulations on selected fisheries.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Centrarchid Technical Committee of the North Central
Division initiated the idea for this survey. Luke Freeman gathered
most of the information on current creel and length limits. Joe
Addison, Charles Ayer, Walter Beer, Ed Braun, Tim Churchill,
Marion Conover, Ed Enamait, Jim Estes, Patrick Festa, Bennie
Fontenot, Gene Gilliland, Larry Goedde, Tim Goeman, Todd
Grischke, Richard Hansen, Richard Hartley, Chris Horton, Bubba
Hubbard, Keith Hurley, Gary Isbell, Steve Jackson, Robert Jacobs,
Rick Jordan, Steve Kerr, Robin Knox, Ken Kurzawski, Scott
Lamprecht, Jason LeBlanc, Robert Lorantas, Cathy Martin, Duncon
McInnes, Tom Mosher, Gary Novinger, Russell Ober, Robert
Papson, Fred Partridge, Cel Petro, Tom Pettengill, Greg Power, Jeff
Ross, Terry Shrader, Tim Simonson, Dan Stephenson, Dennis
Unkenholz, Scott Van Horn, Mark Warren, and Kirk Young completed our mail survey. Dan Isermann, Bill McKibbin, Don
Gablehouse, Kevin Pope, and Dave Willis reviewed drafts of the survey and participated in preliminary discussions, and Kevin Pope, Joe
Hennessy, and one anonymous reviewer provided constructive criticism on an earlier draft of this manuscript.
Fisheries
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007
Making Waves in
Acoustic Telemetry
71
REFERENCES
Ager, L. M. 1991. Effects of an increased size
limit for largemouth bass in West Point
Reservoir. Proceedings of the 43rd Annual
Conference Southeastern Association of
Fish and Wildlife Agencies 43:172-181.
Bowen, J. T. 1970. A history of fish culture as
related to the development of fishery
programs. Pages 71-93 in N. G. Benson, ed.
A century of fisheries in North America.
American Fisheries Society Special
Publication 7, Bethesda, Maryland.
Carlander, K. D. 1977. Handbook of
freshwater fishery biology, volume 2. Iowa
State University Press, Ames.
Fisher, W. L., J. J. Charbonneau, and M. J.
Hay. 1986. Economic characteristics of
reservoir fisheries. Pages 5-10 in G. E. Hall
and M. D. Van Den Avyle, eds. Reservoir
fisheries management: strategies for the
80s. Reservoir Committee, Southern
Division American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, Maryland.
Fox, A. C. 1975. Effects of traditional harvest
regulations on bass populations and fishing.
Pages 392-398 in R.H. Stroud and H.
Clepper, eds. Black bass biology and
management. Sport Fishing Institute,
Washington, D.C.
Fuller, P. L., L. G. Nico, and J. D. Williams.
1999. Nonindigenous fishes introduced into
inland waters of the United States.
American Fisheries Society, Special
Publication 27, Bethesda, Maryland.
McCauley, R. W., and D. M. Kilgour. 1990.
Effect of air temperature on growth of
72
Fisheries
VOL
32
NO
FEBRUARY
2007